To: Bogey78O
Weighing competing harms is an age old legal concept. If true that his life was in imminent harm and that breaking into a property to achieve shelter from the elements was his only option to save his life, he has a decent argument. We have a porous border. He could go to Mexico and escape our harsh winters. People have a right to own property without free loaders crapping, pissing, and spreading diseases on your property you have saved and invested in.
To: LoneRangerMassachusetts
One cardinal Marxist doctrine is “abolition of private property”. Frivolous lawsuits and court cases that attack private property rights are the Marxists’ forté.
13 posted on
06/23/2016 11:45:13 AM PDT by
Olog-hai
To: LoneRangerMassachusetts
Spoken like a northeaserner who never has to deal with Mexico.
If he slipped through going the wrong way he would be dead.
32 posted on
06/23/2016 12:58:08 PM PDT by
MrEdd
(Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
To: LoneRangerMassachusetts
We have a porous border. He could go to Mexico and escape our harsh winters. It's only porous one way.
You cross into Mexico illegally, you're a criminal. You been 'on vacation'
40 posted on
06/23/2016 4:14:44 PM PDT by
maine-iac7
(A Christian is as a Christian does - "By their works...")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson